March 9 New York Times

Since I had never read about the Academy Awards in the Times, the angle they took on covering the event was much different than what I expected. There was no "best dressed" or "worst dressed" and not even a lot of commentary on the winners of each category at the Oscars. Rather, they made an intelligent analysis of the structure and filming of the event, and how this affected viewers and ratings. It truly seemed like an analysis of the oscars, from George Clooney's glum face to the Meryl Streep jokes, and the 10 best picture nominees. It was refreshing and made me feel a little better about focusing on an article about the Oscars, rather than, say, health care.